1986 (10) TMI 200

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....or the Respondent. [Order per : P.C. Jain, Member (T)]. - This is an appeal originally filed as a Revision application to the Addl. Secretary, Government of India, Ministry of Finance,. Department of Revenue, New Delhi. It has been transferred to this Tribunal in terms of the provisions of 35P of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944. 2. The appellants by their letter dated the 8th ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e drawn from the product has shown that it is in the form of 4 Ply Yarn intertwined and twisted together to form a single composite Yarn". 4. The lower authorities have held that the product is manufactured out of spun staple fibre yarn and is different from simple double fold staple fibre yarn or textured yarn. The process involved in such transformation amounts to manufacture, it is mark....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....es. We observe that by twisting of several strands of Cellulosic Spun Yarn, the product still remains covered under Tariff Item 18III of CET. The so called "Fancy Yarn"* produced by the appellants comes within the four corners of the description of Cellulosic Spun Yarn as given in the said Tariff Yarn Item 18III. It is reproduced below for proper appreciation:- "Yarn in which man-made fibre of ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.....T. 1853) is misplaced inasmuch as the product involved in that case was yarn which was manufactured by doubling and twisting of two distinct types of yarns falling under two distinct Tariff Items namely Rayon filament yarn and the other Polyester Spun Yarn. On the other hand, we find that ratio of decision of the Tribunal in the case of Collector of Central Excise, Bhubaneshwar v. Orissa Weavers ....